Dear Editor
Recent public announcements by SaskPower, first to inform that their net metering program would be cancelled two years earlier than anticipated, then very quickly a followup to introduce a replacement program, generated shock waves in those most affected. Net metering in Saskatchewan allowed residents to generate electricity, largely from solar panels, and to “bank” surplus production in the provincial electricity grid during the summer months, then draw on the credit generated for winter consumption when solar production declines very significantly. The new program essentially ends the one to one credit generated previously and forces producers to “buy back” their surplus summer electricity at $0.075 per kWh. (By contrast, Manitobans pay only $0.87 per kWh without a solar generator – their power grid is fed largely by hydro sources.)
We have installed a solar array producing 100 per cent of our annual electrical needs, but spent $34,000 to do so, and this past year generated a return on our investment of only 3.7 per cent; if we had to “buy back” our surplus summer production at $0.075 per kWh in winter as the new plan calls for our return on investment would drop to approximately half that, or less than two per cent. Less than a one year GIC at the bank earns!
Solar industry representatives are absolutely correct when they say that unless the one to one credit system is reinstated it will kill the growing renewable energy business, and along with it the jobs of many hundreds of Saskatchewan residents. I can”t imagine very many people would be willing to invest the substantial sums required for that level of return. ( Note that those of us already in the system have been told that for us the former program will continue for another nine years.)
Now I hasten to add for the benefit of those renewable energy advocates ready to castigate SaskPower for its lack of environmental responsibility, there was a very good reason why SaskPower established a limit to the program (though I suspect it could have been higher than the one half per cent of total provincial generating capacity). Until an economical means of storing excess summer electrical production can be devised there is a very definite limit to how much solar power can be absorbed by the system, which depends on the provincial power grid for “storage,” and that in turn is powered here in Saskatchewan largely by coal. The grid could probably be fed with natural gas, which would produce only half the greenhouse gasses of coal, but my understanding is that option has been scuttled by the federal government”s decree that all new electrical generating plants will be subject to a “carbon tax,” thus making that option uneconomical.
I count myself among the forefront of those concerned by the growing damage our human “footprint,” and not in particular the carbon footprint, is doing to this finite planet we inhabit, but until all of us are willing to greatly reduce our consumption; to live a far simpler life than most of us now live, I believe we face a very uncertain future. Switching over totally to solar power and electric cars is not only impossible in the near term, but even if feasible would be only a very small part of the solution.
James Wiebe
Sonningdale
